ID:2202121
 
Resolved
A new map parameter, zoom-mode, has been introduced to allow better control over upscaling behavior. Values are "normal" (default), "distort", and "blur".

Normal mode is the default that was intended from around 509-510 onward, but did not appear correctly on some video cards. (See ID:2198553.) Distort mode is what was seen on many of those cards, where upscaling caused duplicated or dropped rows of pixels to compensate for non-integer zoom sizes. (Distortion upscaling looks best when the zoom is almost an integer, or when it is very high. At integer zoom sizes, distort and normal are identical.) Blur is the much older behavior caused by upscaling on many systems, using simple bilinear sampling.

Downscaling is always bilinear, regardless of this parameter.
Applies to:Dream Seeker
Status: Resolved (511.1369)

This issue has been resolved.
Some users have requested an upscaling format that distorts the map by adding/removing rows and columns of pixels, rather than the new shader introduced in 1367 that corrects previous buggy behavior.
Lummox JR resolved issue with message:
A new map parameter, zoom-mode, has been introduced to allow better control over upscaling behavior. Values are "normal" (default), "distort", and "blur".

Normal mode is the default that was intended from around 509-510 onward, but did not appear correctly on some video cards. (See ID:2198553.) Distort mode is what was seen on many of those cards, where upscaling caused duplicated or dropped rows of pixels to compensate for non-integer zoom sizes. (Distortion upscaling looks best when the zoom is almost an integer, or when it is very high. At integer zoom sizes, distort and normal are identical.) Blur is the much older behavior caused by upscaling on many systems, using simple bilinear sampling.

Downscaling is always bilinear, regardless of this parameter.
Downscaling is always bilinear, regardless of this parameter.

I figured I just warn you that at some point in the future, we might (maybe) request downscaling options too. =P

I don't know where trying 64x again fits on the roadmap, but we'll see when we get there.

Anywho this is excellent, I don't want to take away from that. We really do appreciate how responsive you've been.